You're moving your horsey wrong

[pelagius]

Well, I specifically took the time (long about an hour) to respond to this thread because YOU posted it. Far too often (I can feel Babs's daggers coming out right now to cut off some part of my body), I will spend a good amount of time writing something out, that is disciplined and poignant to a high discourse, only to find that NO ONE responds to the damned thing. Or, if they do, most people check out of the discussion because the post is too lengthy or too wordy or too esoteric.

This has definitely changed the quality of my posts in the Foyer since my arrival, and your observation isn't unjust, but I'd add that you can choose to walk away from here because of the lack of discipline, or you can bring the discipline and charisma back to it by elevating the discourse via your presence. I will always read a KatyLied, SIEQ, or pelagius post, especially in the Foyer, because I recognize a certain level of polish in what I'm about to read. But, I also like to not have to "be at work" constantly, and at times I do lower what I'm saying to get a laugh or to get a response because forums seldom work without people responding to one another.

Sorry, Wuap ... I didn't mean it like that (I don't think) ... I meant it in the context of my incorrect assumptions of how people were interpreting Genesis. My core assumption was probably wrong so I have to entirely rethink my statement in light of what people on CUF are actually doing. Does that make sense?

[LA Ute]

Whoops. I've been sitting here looking at what I think you may be talking about. This article was published in Sunstone in '79, and is entitled Scripture History and Myth.

http://sunstoneonline.com/magazine/i.../014-49-50.pdf

From his vitae this appears to be the one you are talking about, but it may be a tad too new for you

Et tu, IJR?

I think that may be it. Thanks! I'll read it later.

[IPU] reads and comments in most threads, even when he disagrees with the tone of the majority in a thread (he's kind of like you, only much more manly and tougher).

I will now turn the other cheek. (Meaning, I am figuratively mooning you with only one side.)

[wuapinmon]

Sorry, Wuap ... I didn't mean it like that (I don't think) ... I meant it in the context of my incorrect assumptions of how people were interpreting Genesis. My core assumption was probably wrong so I have to entirely rethink my statement in light of what people on CUF are actually doing. Does that make sense?

Sure. No worries.

If I had to post my feelings on the Book of Genesis, I think I would say, I don't care who wrote it or whether it's literal or allegorical or figurative in its representations of eternal principles.

When I learn to follow the Savior, then I can worry about whether or not Adam and Eve really made fig-leaf aprons or not.

My point is that SIEQ has had a profound effect on my understanding of the Gospel. "We exist in narratives." Damn, that was brilliant, SIEQ. One of the best things I read in the entire previous decade, regardless of subject.

[wuapinmon]

Et tu, IJR?

I think that may be it. Thanks! I'll read it later.



I will now turn the other cheek. (Meaning, I am figuratively mooning you with only one side.)

What does it take to earn a Westley-grade title from you, old man?

[TripletDaddy]

Sorry, Wuap ... I didn't mean it like that (I don't think) ... I meant it in the context of my incorrect assumptions of how people were interpreting Genesis. My core assumption was probably wrong so I have to entirely rethink my statement in light of what people on CUF are actually doing. Does that make sense?

pelagiu$, I will chime in to say that I appreciated your post. I think the issue is thought provoking, but I personally didn't feel like I fell into the category that you were describing and therefore couldn't opine one way or another. I always find it interesting to learn how others here interpret scripture and it seems that just when I think I have figured someone out on this board, they throw a curveball with one of their religious posts and it forces me to go back to the drawing board.

As it has been noted previously in other threads, we often see ourselves much differently than we see others. I know that CUF has the reputation for being an apostate's paradise, but truthfully, I would describe most of the people here as very faithful members (the obvious exception being those that self-identify as NoMos...and even then, they are all great people, even Old Scratch himself, who is probably one of the best).

I don't want to run too afoul of your thread, but did want to take the time to thank you for your really nice thread. You may be right...perhaps you need to rethink your premise....or not. I don't know.

ps i will say this....I did find the chess metaphor confusing. Personally, I have never encountered nor seen anything that you described while playing chess, much less seen it enough for certain analogous situations to remind me of such chess moves. but hey...that's just me.

[pelagius]

ps i will say this....I did find the chess metaphor confusing. Personally, I have never encountered nor seen anything that you described while playing chess, much less seen it enough for certain analogous situations to remind me of such chess moves. but hey...that's just me.

Apparently the joke was the written equivalent of a UtahDan picture commentary thing (or whatever it is we call what he does).

[UtahDan]

Apparently the joke was the written equivalent of a UtahDan picture commentary thing (or whatever it is we call what he does).

Awesomeness is the word you are searching for.

[UtahDan]

Wuap: This is not a cute question, I am sincere. When you run into that willful ignorance does it make it hard for you to love the people engaging in it?

Why do I ask? Well, as UtahDan knows, I routinely argue that it's important to be careful what we say in church classes, whether as teachers or class members, so as not to injure the "tender shoots." I am sure that in your ward you have your share of newer members. We do in our ward. The older I get the more I am convinced that the most important thing we can do in church is love one another. That may sound quaint and simplistic to some, but I think it is undeniable. When we behave among other members in a way that causes some to leave church angry or hurt or needing to forgive or be forgiven, I am not sure we are moving the ball down the field the way we really want to.

Heaven knows I have been in all those positions many times - much more often in my brash youth than now. (Fortunately repentance is available for all of us.)

I am rambling but I hope this makes sense. Collisions at church are unavoidable, of course, but IMO, the intense focus here on CUF on the "storms" arising from what is said or taught in church classes is largely misplaced. But that is just me. I hope no one interprets this as a criticism of anyone personally or as any kind of judgment of anyone. Just an older guy's perspectives. (I am only 55 but that is probably at least 20 years older than the average poster here, maybe even more. I used to be a young guy; what happened, anyway?)

Would you agree with me that the spirit and tone with which a comment is delivered is HUGE? Don't we see this around here all the time? I think it is hard for some people, however, not to come off as strident. It is a skill, one that I am still working on.

[LA Ute]

What does it take to earn a Westley-grade title from you, old man?

Well, personal insults alone will not do it for you. Why do you care anyway, you warthog-faced buffoon?

(You don't really qualify because our relationship is so respectful. But I'll make an exception for you.)

[LA Ute]

Would you agree with me that the spirit and tone with which a comment is delivered is HUGE? Don't we see this around here all the time? I think it is hard for some people, however, not to come off as strident. It is a skill, one that I am still working on.

Oh, shut up, you big jerk.

[wuapinmon]

Well, personal insults alone will not do it for you. Why do you care anyway, you warthog-faced buffoon?

(You don't really qualify because our relationship is so respectful. But I'll make an exception for you.)

I don't want your charity, grandpa. I want to earn it.

[LA Ute]

I don't want your charity, grandpa. I want to earn it.

From warthog-faced buffoon to miserable vomitous mass in only two posts. Unprecedented. And richly deserved. YOhio, eat your heart out.

[YOhio]

From warthog-faced buffoon to miserable vomitous mass in only two posts. Unprecedented. And richly deserved. YOhio, eat your heart out.

This is a new low, even for you. Wuap has been really sick lately and so you make fun of him because he vomits a lot of mass. You top that off by pointing out how I can eat to my heart's content (without vomiting). Very declasse, LA Ute.

[LA Ute]

This is a new low, even for you. Wuap has been really sick lately and so you make fun of him because he vomits a lot of mass. You top that off by pointing out how I can eat to my heart's content (without vomiting). Very declasse, LA Ute.

I like the way you are parting your hair these days, YO.

[pellegrino]

I don't normally do this, but I was looking for another pelagius post (still looking) and came across this gem of a thread, which I remember reading, but as is usually the case I got a lot more out of it from a second reading. I really appreciated pelagius' and wuap's exchanges, very well thought out and written. This is definitely the type of thread I appreciate most in the foyer. I think the Falconer article that IJ linked is excellent, should be standard reading during an OT year.

So, my question (imo if you're going to bump something at least try to stimulate fresh discussion) is directed to pelagius. Do you feel the discourse in the foyer has changed even since you posted this? if so, how?